Search Results

Search found 1591 results on 64 pages for 'oop criticism'.

Page 32/64 | < Previous Page | 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39  | Next Page >

  • C# and Objects/Classes

    - by user1192890
    I have tried to compile code from Deitel's C# 2010 for programmers. I copied it exactly out of the book, but it still can't find main, even though I declared it in one of the classes. Here is a look at the two classes: For GradeBookTest: // Fig. 4.2: GradeBookTest.cs // Create a GradeBook object and call its DisplayMessage method. public class GradeBookTest { // Main method begins program execution public static void Main(string[] args) { // create a GradeBook object and assign it to myGradeBook GradeBook myGradeBook = new GradeBook(); // call myGradeBook's DisplayMessage method myGradeBook.DisplayMessage(); } // end Main } // end class GradeBookTest Now for the GradeBook class: // Fig. 4.1: GradeBook.cs // Class declaration with one method. using System; public class GradeBook { // display a welcome message to the GradeBook user public void DisplayMessage() { Console.WriteLine( "Welcome to the Grade Book!" ); } // end method DisplayMessage } // end class GradeBook That is how I copied them. Here is how they appeared in the book: 1 // Fig. 4.2: GradeBookTest.cs 2 // Create a GradeBook object and call its DisplayMessage method. 3 public class GradeBookTest 4 { 5 // Main method begins program execution 6 public static void Main( string[] args ) 7 { 8 // create a GradeBook object and assign it to myGradeBook 9 GradeBook myGradeBook = new GradeBook(); 10 11 // call myGradeBook's DisplayMessage method 12 myGradeBook.DisplayMessage(); 13 } // end Main 14 } // end class GradeBookTest and // Fig. 4.1: GradeBook.cs // Class declaration with one method. using System; public class GradeBook { // display a welcome message to the GradeBook user public void DisplayMessage() { Console.WriteLine( "Welcome to the Grade Book!" ); } // end method DisplayMessage } // end class GradeBook I don't see why they are not working. Right now I am using Visual Studio Pro 2010. Any Thoughts?

    Read the article

  • How can i split up a component using cfinclude and still use inheritance?

    - by rip747
    Note: this is just a simplized example of what i'm trying to do to get the idea across. The problem I'm having is that I want to use cfinclude inside cfcomponent so that i can group like methods into separate files for more manageability. The problem I'm running into is when i try to extend another component that also uses cfinclude to manage it's method as demostrated below. Note that ComponentA extends ComponentB: ComponentA ========== <cfcomponent output="false" extends="componentb"> <cfinclude template="componenta/methods.cfm"> </cfcomponent> componenta/methods.cfm ====================== <cffunction name="a"><cfreturn "componenta-a"></cffunction> <cffunction name="b"><cfreturn "componenta-b"></cffunction> <cffunction name="c"><cfreturn "componenta-c"></cffunction> <cffunction name="d"><cfreturn super.a()></cffunction> ComponentB ========== <cfcomponent output="false"> <cfinclude template="componentb/methods.cfm"> </cfcomponent> componentb/methods.cfm ====================== <cffunction name="a"><cfreturn "componentb-a"></cffunction> <cffunction name="b"><cfreturn "componentb-b"></cffunction> <cffunction name="c"><cfreturn "componentb-c"></cffunction> The issue is that when i try to initialize ComponentA I get an the error: "Routines cannot be declared more than once. The routine a has been declared twice in different templates." The whole reason for this is because when you use cfinclude it's evaluated at RUN TIME instead of COMPILE TIME. Short of moving the methods into the components themselves and eliminating the use of cfinclude, how can i get around this or does someone have a better idea splitting up large components?

    Read the article

  • OO Design: use Properties or Overloaded methods?

    - by Robert Frank
    Question about OO design. Suppose I have a base object vehicle. And two descendants: truck and automobile. Further, suppose the base object has a base method: FixFlatTire(); abstract; When the truck and automobile override the base object's, they require different information from the caller. Am I better off overloading FixFlatTire like this in the two descendant objects: Procedure Truck.FixFlatTire( OfficePhoneNumber: String; NumberOfAxles: Integer): Override; Overload; Procedure Automobile.FixFlatTire( WifesPhoneNumber: String; AAAMembershipID: String): Override; Overload; Or introducing new properties in each of the descendants and then setting them before calling FixFlatTire, like this: Truck.OfficePhoneNumber := '555-555-1212'; Truck.NumberOfAxles := 18; Truck.FixFlatTire(); Automobile.WifesPhoneNumber := '555-555-2323'; Automobile.AAAMembershipID := 'ABC'; Automobile.FixFlatTire();

    Read the article

  • Graphic editor opensource project example on c++ underlying composite pattern

    - by G-71
    Can you tell me when I can see a some opensource project (only project on C++ language), which is simple graphic editor, ?ontaining following primitive (for example): an ellipse, a rectangle, a line. And desirable, that to be able to group this primitive in one primitive (for example, Word Grouping - Group). Composite pattern use is desirable in this project. I want to see how to organize classes, but more serious for me is to see how organize grouping operation. I searched for it on codeproject.com codeproject.com, codeplex.com, but not found this. I have already some source http://pastebin.com/xe4JF5PW But in my opinion, this code is dirty and ugly. Therefore, I want to see some opensource project for example. Thanks!

    Read the article

  • Why does PHP 5.2 disallow abstract static class methods?

    - by Artem Russakovskii
    After enabling strict warnings in PHP 5.2, I saw a load of strict standards warnings from a project that was originally written without strict warnings: Strict Standards: Static function Program::getSelectSQL() should not be abstract in Program.class.inc The function in question belongs to an abstract parent class Program and is declared abstract static because it should be implemented in its child classes, such as TVProgram. I did find references to this change here: Dropped abstract static class functions. Due to an oversight, PHP 5.0.x and 5.1.x allowed abstract static functions in classes. As of PHP 5.2.x, only interfaces can have them. My question is: can someone explain in a clear way why there shouldn't be an abstract static function in PHP?

    Read the article

  • Factory vs instance constructors

    - by Neil N
    I can't think of any reasons why one is better than the other. Compare these two implementations: public class MyClass { public myClass(string fileName) { // some code... } } as opposed to: public class MyClass { private myClass(){} public static Create(string fileName) { // some code... } } There are some places in the .Net framework that use the static method to create instances. At first I was thinking, it registers it's instances to keep track of them, but regular constructors could do the same thing through the use of private static variables. What is the reasoning behind this style?

    Read the article

  • Javascript: Access the right scope "under" apply(...)

    - by Chau
    This is a very old problem, but I cannot seem to get my head around the other solutions presented here. I have an object function ObjA() { var a = 1; this.methodA = function() { alert(a); } } which is instantiated like var myObjA = new ObjA(); Later on, I assign my methodA as a handler function in an external Javascript Framework, which invokes it using the apply(...) method. When the external framework executes my methodA, this belongs to the framework function invoking my method. Since I cannot change how my method is called, how do I regain access to the private variable a? My research tells me, that closures might be what I'm looking for.

    Read the article

  • where are the frameworks for creating libraries?

    - by fayer
    whenever i create a php library (not a framework) i tend to reinvent everything everytime. "where to put configuration options" "which design pattern to use here" "how should all the classes extend each other" and so on... then i think, isn't there a good library framework to use anywhere? it's like a framework for a web application (symfony, cakephp...) but instead of creating a web application, this framework will help coder to create a library, providing all the standard structure and classes (observer pattern, dependency injection etc). i think that will be the next major thing if not available right now. in this way there will be a standard to follow when creating libraries, or else, it's like a djungle when everyone creates their own structure, and a lot of coders just code without thinking of reusability etc. there isn't any framework for creating libraries at the moment? if not, don't u agree with me that this is the way to do it, with a library framework? cause i am really throwing a lot of time (weeks!) just thinking about how to organize things, both in code and file level, when i should just start to code the logic. share your thoughts!

    Read the article

  • How to "wrap" implementation in C#

    - by igor
    Hello, I have these classes in C# (.NET Framework 3.5) described below: public class Base { public int State {get; set;} public virtual int Method1(){} public virtual string Method2(){} ... public virtual void Method10(){} } public class B: Base { // some implementation } public class Proxy: Base { private B _b; public class Proxy(B b) { _b = b; } public override int Method1() { if (State == Running) return _b.Method1(); else return base.Method1(); } public override string Method2() { if (State == Running) return _b.Method2(); else return base.Method2(); } public override void Method10() { if (State == Running) _b.Method10(); else base.Method10(); } } I want to get something this: public Base GetStateDependentImplementation() { if (State == Running) // may be some other rule return _b; else return base; // compile error } and my Proxy's implementation will be: public class Proxy: Base { ... public override int Method1() { return GetStateDependentImplementation().Method1(); } public override string Method2() { return GetStateDependentImplementation().Method2(); } ... } Of course, I can do this (aggregation of base implementation): public RepeaterOfBase: Base // no any overrides, just inheritance { } public class Proxy: Base { private B _b; private RepeaterOfBase _Base; public class Proxy(B b, RepeaterOfBase aBase) { _b = b; _base = aBase; } } ... public Base GetStateDependentImplementation() { if (State == Running) return _b; else return _Base; } ... But instance of Base class is very huge and I have to avoid to have other additional copy in memory. So I have to simplify my code have to "wrap" implementation have to avoid a code duplication have to avoid aggregation of any additional instance of Base class (duplication) Is it possible to reach these goals?

    Read the article

  • which situation abstract class i should use

    - by Bharanikumar
    Hi , Am not worked on extream level of oops in my projects , So i have little doubts , In which situation should i use abstract method or classes , Basically i know about abstract class definition and flow, I got details from this URL Doubt is which situation should i use abstract class and methods ,

    Read the article

  • how to Clean up(destructor) a dynamic Array of pointers??

    - by Ahmed Sharara
    Is that Destructor is enough or do I have to iterate to delete the new nodes?? #include "stdafx.h" #include<iostream> using namespace std; struct node{ int row; int col; int value; node* next_in_row; node* next_in_col; }; class MultiLinkedListSparseArray { private: char *logfile; node** rowPtr; node** colPtr; // used in constructor node* find_node(node* out); node* ins_node(node* ins,int col); node* in_node(node* ins,node* z); node* get(node* in,int row,int col); bool exist(node* so,int row,int col); //add anything you need public: MultiLinkedListSparseArray(int rows, int cols); ~MultiLinkedListSparseArray(); void setCell(int row, int col, int value); int getCell(int row, int col); void display(); void log(char *s); void dump(); }; MultiLinkedListSparseArray::MultiLinkedListSparseArray(int rows,int cols){ rowPtr=new node* [rows+1]; colPtr=new node* [cols+1]; for(int n=0;n<=rows;n++) rowPtr[n]=NULL; for(int i=0;i<=cols;i++) colPtr[i]=NULL; } MultiLinkedListSparseArray::~MultiLinkedListSparseArray(){ // is that destructor enough?? cout<<"array is deleted"<<endl; delete [] rowPtr; delete [] colPtr; }

    Read the article

  • Best way to design a class in python

    - by Fraz
    So, this is more like a philosophical question for someone who is trying to understand classes. Most of time, how i use class is actually a very bad way to use it. I think of a lot of functions and after a time just indent the code and makes it a class and replacing few stuff with self.variable if a variable is repeated a lot. (I know its bad practise) But anyways... What i am asking is: class FooBar: def __init__(self,foo,bar): self._foo = foo self._bar = bar self.ans = self.__execute() def __execute(self): return something(self._foo, self._bar) Now there are many ways to do this: class FooBar: def __init__(self,foo): self._foo = foo def execute(self,bar): return something(self._foo, bar) Can you suggest which one is bad and which one is worse? or any other way to do this. This is just a toy example (offcourse). I mean, there is no need to have a class here if there is one function.. but lets say in __execute something() calls a whole set of other methods.. ?? Thanks

    Read the article

  • Class works without declaring variables?

    - by Maxim Droy
    I'm learned php as functional and procedure language. Right now try to start learn objective-oriented and got an important question. I have code: class car { function set_car($model) { $this->model = $model; } function check_model() { if($this->model == "Mercedes") echo "Good car"; } } $mycar = new car; $mycar->set_car("Mercedes"); echo $mycar->check_model(); Why it does work without declaration of $model? var $model; in the begin? Because in php works "auto-declaration" for any variables? I'm stuck

    Read the article

  • Set The Progress Bar Over 100% C#

    - by PhaDaPhunk
    its my first time using a ProgressBar in c#. The idea is to use the ProgressBar as an health bar in a simple game. The thing is I think the bar's maximum value is 100% but i would like to give it a higher value like let's say 1000% or, not sure if it's possible, give the bar an integer value instead of a percentage. progressBar1.Increment(100); This is where I initialize the health to 100points. Even if I use this syntax: progressBar1.Increment(1000); And I subtract : progressBar1.Increment(-25); The player is loosing 1/4 of is life as if he only had 100 Health Points. Any idea how I could change the maximum Bar value? Thanks in advance.

    Read the article

  • When do you use metaclasses?

    - by johannix
    Just started looking into metaclasses and while they seem powerful, I can think of other ways to accomplish the same type of thing. I was wondering when metaclasses have been found to be the right answer and why.

    Read the article

  • How can I use Object Oriented Javascript to interact with HTML Objects

    - by Steve
    I am very new to object orientated javascript, with experience writing gui's in python and java. I am trying to create html tables that I can place in locations throughout a webpage. Each html table would have two css layouts that control if it is selected or not. I can write all of the interaction if I only have one table. It gets confusing when I have multiple tables. I am wondering how to place these tables throughout a blank webpage and then access the tables individually. I think I am having trouble understanding how inheritance and hierarchy works in javascript/html. NOTE: I am not asking how to make a table. I am trying to dynamically create multiple tables and place them throughout a webpage. Then access their css independently and change it (move them to different locations or change the way the look, independently of the other tables).

    Read the article

  • "Abstract static" method - how?

    - by polyglot
    There are already several SO questions on why there is not abstract static method/field as such, but I'm wondering about how one would go about implementing the following psuedo-code: class Animal { abstract static int getNumberOfLegs(); // not possible } class Chicken inherits Animal { static int getNumberOfLegs() { return 2; } class Dog inherits Animal { static int getNumberOfLegs() { return 4; } Here is the problem: Assuming that I want make sure that every class that inherits Animal to contain getNumberOfLegs() method (i.e. almost like an interface, except I do want the abstract class to implement several methods that are common to all child classes, hence pure interface does not work here). getNumberOfLegs() obviously should be a static method (assuming that in a perfect world we dont' have crippled chicken and dogs so getNumberOfLegs is not instance-dependent). Without an "abstract static" method/field, one can either leave the method out from Animal class, then there is the risk that some child class do not have that method. Or one can make getNumberOfLegs an instance method, but then one would have to instantiate a class to find out how many legs that animal has - even though it is not necessary. How do one usually go about implementing this situation?

    Read the article

  • Is it true that in most Object Oriented Programming Languages, an "i" in an instance method always r

    - by Jian Lin
    In the following code: <script type="text/javascript"> var i = 10; function Circle(radius) { this.r = radius; this.i = radius; } Circle.i = 123; Circle.prototype.area = function() { alert(i); } var c = new Circle(1); var a = c.area(); </script> What is being alerted? The answer is at the end of this question. I found that the i in the alert call either refers to any local (if any), or the global variable. There is no way that it can be the instance variable or the class variable even when there is no local and no global defined. To refer to the instance variable i, we need this.i, and to the class variable i, we need Circle.i. Is this actually true for almost all Object oriented programming languages? Any exception? Are there cases that when there is no local and no global, it will look up the instance variable and then the class variable scope? (or in this case, are those called scope?) the answer is: 10 is being alerted.

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39  | Next Page >